Re: [asa] Space compression

From: George Cooper <>
Date: Sun Oct 28 2007 - 17:58:54 EDT


I'll prime the pump with my amateur astronomy skills....

Two simple arguments against any 6000 or so light year universe, for those
who still hold to that idea, are:

1) The Hubble has taken images of very deep space that demonstrates the
ability for us to behold more than 100 billion galaxies. [131 billion was
the calculated number from the first famous image which revealed an
estimated 10,000 galaxies.] How do you squeeze them in a 6000 lyr radius?

2) Supernova 1987a in the nearby Magellanic dwarf galaxy has a visibile
expanding shell. Simple trigonometry demonstrates that it is ~ 168,000 lyrs
distance. Simple trig makes this measurement independent of the speed of

In your example of flux intensity, are you compressing everything observed
into a small universe to obtain such a flux? I am unsure of the scenario

George A.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Armstrong" <>
To: "ASA" <>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 7:58 PM
Subject: [asa] Space compression

>I have a question for our astronomer friends.
> The good Dr. Strachan actually (unintentionally) provoked it.
> One of the usual arguments for an old universe has to do with the direct
> measurement of the position and movements of some night-sky objects, and
> such things, all argued from the positions of science and logic.
> But it occurred to me to wonder exactly what some of the consequences
> would be if the intergalactic and interstellar spacings were consistent
> witha 6000 (or 10,000) year Creation.
> As one example, it seems to me that this might compress the distances
> between suns in a galaxy (for instance) to the point where the flux of
> stellar energy within the galaxy would not permit anything like an earth
> (or perhaps even the suns) to exist. If that is true for Andromeda (for
> example), and if there is no reason to conclude that our own galaxy is
> other than essentially similar to Andromeda, then our very existence would
> argue against the Young Earth premise.
> This is a little akin to the radiation intensification consequence of the
> period of accelerated radiation proposed by the RATE project.
> Is this radiation consequence a valid presumption? Are there other
> consequences of this temporal foreshortening?
> This query is by way of a continuing search for ways to fairly simply
> illustrate for a lay audience some of the simpler problems that flow very
> directly from a YEC time line.
> Regards - JimA [Friend of ASA]
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Oct 28 17:59:46 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 28 2007 - 17:59:46 EDT